It's not right, but historically it "makes sense" - the Cold War is between us and WW2. Plus, of course, post-war it plays to the local government's interest to emphasise your own country's contribution.
Another factor is; a lot of senior (and sometimes non-senior) officers were comissioned after the war to write memoirs and histories - these were at best personal views and at worst outright biased. Because of secrecy (which the cold war didn't help remove) these were often the only reference material for 20th century historians.
A great example is a lot of the work on deception during WW2 (one of my pet subjects). Early works were heavily redacted and biased, and later seemingly scholarly works by real historians have since been shown to be simply parroting a lot of that misinformation. It is only in the last 5-10 years as material has been declassified that the truth begins to emerge.
Another factor is; a lot of senior (and sometimes non-senior) officers were comissioned after the war to write memoirs and histories - these were at best personal views and at worst outright biased. Because of secrecy (which the cold war didn't help remove) these were often the only reference material for 20th century historians.
A great example is a lot of the work on deception during WW2 (one of my pet subjects). Early works were heavily redacted and biased, and later seemingly scholarly works by real historians have since been shown to be simply parroting a lot of that misinformation. It is only in the last 5-10 years as material has been declassified that the truth begins to emerge.